NOTE: If you are subscribed to Seattle Bubble’s RSS feed and are seeing these open threads in the feed, please switch to our official feed at http://feeds.feedburner.com/SeattleBubble Thanks!
Here is your open thread for the mid-week on April 11th, 2012. You may post random links and off-topic discussions here. Also, if you have an idea or a topic you’d like to see covered in an article, please make it known.
Be sure to also check out the forums, and get your word in the user-driven discussions there!
MAP OF THE DEAD ZOMBIE SURVIVAL MAP
http://www.mapofthedead.com/
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Pegasus @ 1 – WTF is that, and why should anyone click on it?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 52:
Worse will be Medicare/Medicaid. They can’t advantage of inflation with those promises, because they require services, and those promises will make the price increases in those areas much worse.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 2 – Because it has locations of gun stores.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Hello, moral hazard.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/11/business/lenders-returning-to-the-lucrative-subprime-market.html
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Statistics gone wild- what “they” know about you. Apathetic democrats like 7-UP, republican active voters prefer Dr.Pepper, and more:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/04/the-creepiness-factor-how-obama-and-romney-are-getting-to-know-you/255499/#slide5
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Scotsman @ 6 –
Those Busch-drinking, WWE-watching, Mitsubishi-driving folks really have to start getting the vote out.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Green Energy Jobs in Wash State On the Way
A Richland Nuclear plant is pending a 20 year approval….hey, those Eastern Washington homes are cheap, trade your Seattle one in and cash in on the Green jobs in the state:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2017955972_apwanuclearplant.html?syndication=rss
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By David S @ 4:
Well that’s stupid. It’s not like the Zombies are going to sit around an wait for the federal waiting period to expire. They aren’t even going to let you go buy more ammo! Pointless website. ;-)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By softwarengineer @ 8:
Maybe I’m not getting the joke here, but there are zero new jobs associated with that story – the Energy Northwest (formerly WPPSS) nuclear plant is merely applying for an operating license extension with the NRC:
http://www.energy-northwest.com/generation/cgs/renewal.php
And the houses over there aren’t nearly as cheap as you’d think (especially on a historical basis for that area). I grew up in the Dry-Tri and still have family & friends living there.
If you want a real “green” job, try this website:
http://jobs.trugreen.com/seattle/landscaping-jobs
Rate this comment:
0 
0
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/us-posts-biggest-march-budget-deficit-history-or-how-chart-became-chart
Snips
“Following the all time record high February budget deficit of $232 billion, the US March budget deficit number is in, and in addition to being bigger than expected, coming at $198.2 billion on expectations of “only” $196 billion……This brings the total deficit in fiscal 2012 to $779 billion,……(Oct 1 2011 – March 31, 2012)…..What is most disturbing is that the comparable tax revenues net of refunds, “matching” this increase in deficit and spending, are only $693 billion, in other words the US government is funding well more than half of its cash needs with debt rather than with tax revenue. ”
Come on Pfft…..tell us how spending more than double what you’re making (and of course, racking up the difference on the credit card) is a good thing.
Oh, and to put things in perspective: 779 Billion divided by (approximately) 305 million people in the country is $2,554 a person. Divide that by the 6 months is a mere $426 a month for each and every man, woman and child in the nation. So, those of you with a family of four, you’re going in hock, actually I mean the dip sh**ts in DC are PUTTING you in hock, to the tune of $1,703 PER MONTH. Again, pfft, how is it a good thing that a family of 4 is getting put in hock to the tune of 1700 a month?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 3 – Gradualism is why smoking kills. You can cut by not increasing, by fabricating low/no inflation with heuristics, by extending the carrot of retirment a bit more. Over time, the cutrain will be drawn, and a New Normal established.
“The feeling is definitely there. It’s a new morning in America… fresh, vital. The old cynicism is gone. We have faith in our leaders. We’re optimistic as to what becomes of it all. It really boils down to our ability to accept. We don’t need pessimism. There are no limits.”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Blurtman @ 11 – I’d just make a rule on when to pull the plug! ;-)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: No Name Guy @ 10 –
Before I say anything else, I’ve been against the large annual federal deficits since the 1980′s and the lack of support given by the current administration to the recommendations of the Simpson Bowles Report is an embarassment for the entire country. But with that said, ZeroHedge appears to be cherry picking the data to sensationalize their editorial comment. In order to make it sound like they’ve got something new to bring to the table, they claim revenues are running at less than half of spending. The ZeroHedge post states: “What is most disturbing is that the comparable tax revenues net of refunds, “matching” this increase in deficit and spending, are only $693 billion, in other words the US government is funding well more than half of its cash needs with debt rather than with tax revenue. ”
The same deficit ratio was also present during the first 6 months of the prior fiscal year, but the ratio (although still terrible) was materially different by the end of the year. Its likely that their statement won’t hold true over the course of 2012 either. I think the April thru Sept period tax revenues always run substantially higher, probably at least in part because you’ve got additional tax receipts with the annual returns in April and you’ve got 3 of the 4 estimated tax payment dates during the April to Sept period. Here are the monthly tax receipts and Federal disbursements from 2011 and 2012 showing that was the case last year. If you go to prior years I think it will show much the same thing but I didn’t pull it up.
The Treasury sets out the monthly tax receipts and disbursements in Table one on this link:
http://www.fms.treas.gov/mts/mts0312.pdf
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By One Eyed Man @ 13:
And those estimated payments are for the folks who actually earn a lot of money. More so if corporations have the same dates for estimated payments.
For others though, what OEM is talking about is estimated payments are due 4/15, 6/15 and 9/15 (assuming no weekends interfere with that schedule). So 50% of taxes due are paid in during a 60 day period! Also, any any amounts underpaid for the prior year are typically paid in that same period (April to Sept).
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By One Eyed Man @ 13:
Nooo! Say it ain’t true! /sarc
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: One Eyed Man @ 13 –
So, you’re saying you were against the deficits before you were for them?
Doesn’t matter. Since there isn’t a single adult in the room (even Ryan doesn’t go far enough) I’d give this game another 5-7 years at least before the boom.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 16:
That actually is a logical position. Having deficits for now reason leads to increasing national debt, and then prevents (or reduces) the deficits you can run when you actually need them.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Scotsman @ 16 –
I’ve been telling people since the late 1980′s that the deficits would eventually cause inflation and I’ve already waited 25 years to be right.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: One Eyed Man @ 18 – RE: Scotsman @ 16 –
Let me put this into some perspective. There is a casino in Las Vegas that will be built at a cost of $44 Billion. Do you remember when it was big news that Howard Hughes was a Billionaire? How long ago was that? Not that long.
So when you start throwing around billion dollar numbers, I’m just not as impressed as I would have been ten years ago.
I don’t think we ever will get to a magical point of paying the deficit, even though I think the United States could based on it’s income potential, and ability to cut spending. However government spending is a big, big part of the economy. If the government stops spending a lot of the wealth in this country will dry up.
All I said before was that our government can fund Social Security rather than the military. The result to the economy could well be the same with a different focus.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
OEM
Its a problem (inflation) that takes time to materialize. The high inflation of the 70s and into the early 80′s got started in 1964 with the combination of the spend fest that was the “Great Society” and Vietnam. It took a full 10+ years to get going and hit its peak around, what, 1980 or so (18% T-Bond rates, 16% inflation, or thereabouts). And that was during at least part of the time when there was still sound money (e.g. the gold window was still open – closed in ’71 by Nixon).
Today, its the same – it’ll take time. When will it hit? Don’t know. Just that it will. As far as the past 25 years, Yes, yes, yes….Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 all racked ‘em up. Recall that at the time of Regan, debt to GDP was far more manageable. On the personal scale, if your credit card has only a $500 balance, you can run it for a while before getting into trouble. If it’s a 20k balance and you start running it like a drunk frat boy in a strip club…..well, you get in trouble a heck of a lot faster.
The point being that spending more than you make = BAD. We’re in a hole. Stop digging. Just because the walls haven’t collapsed and buried us, doesn’t mean they won’t, eventually.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: David Losh @ 19 –
David
It’s a fallacy that government spending = positive product.
Some schmuck govt drone in DC, or a local school district “program coordinator” pushing paper produces exactly nothing. Yet their pay and bene’s shows up at a positive on the GDP, not a negative like it should (since they’re taking money that could be spent by the taxpayer on actual goods or services).
In private industry, if someone won’t buy it, or it’s not absolutely necessary to produce a product that someone will buy, it’s ruthlessly cut out.
By that measure, a sizable fraction of what the Govt does is either an active drain or neutral at best. (Neutral would be, for example, a transfer payment – steal from taxpayer A and hand to Sponge / mooch / leech B to spend on actual goods and services, while the active drain in this activity would be the substantial Government administrative expense and over head.)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 16:
That seems like a pretty good prediction. Some time around 8 years from now, medicare spending plus interest on the debt will suck up all the money collected in taxes. (At current health care inflation, of course).
Think about that. No military, no social security, no vast jungle of federal agencies — tax revenues wiped out by medicare and interest alone.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
The cost of medical care has to be addressed, and paid for, some way, and private insurance has proved to be top-heavy in administration, facilities, technology, and spending for the sake of spending.
Health care is most manageable by better living, and better quality of care. I doubt the government will be any better at managing health care, but they are already providing the majority of chronic, and acute care. I think there would be better control, over sight, and regulation of the medical industry if the government ran it.
I don’t expect, and have never expected Social Security, or MediCare, as much as I want to believe it will be around forever. I have heard the same story of how bankrupt Social Security, and MediCare are since I started paying taxes, way back when. However, I’m close, and getting closer to collecting, so I’m going to want my money back, some way, some how.
Like One Eyed Man I have heard doom, and gloom my entire life, but life, and the government just keep going along. The great thing about fiat money is there is no end, its infinite as long as people believe in it, once people wake up it’s a revolution and we start over.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: David S @ 4 –
“Because it has locations of gun stores.”
I love gun stores! I bought a 9mm Baby Glock recently. It fits perfectly in my small hand.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By David Losh @ 23:
What the doomers never understand is the economies that went “boom” were usually small enough so investors had somewhere else to go. Where do you take your investments now if you don’t like the US? The US “dog” has fleas and worms, but the rest are even worse. (Or too small).
My prediction is large parts of Europe and Japan will “go Greece” — meaning they will hit the wall and default. While that’s happening all the scared money will go to US treasuries. Even at nearly 0 percent yield, that’s better than losing your whole stash.
After Europe clears out, it will be safe for investors to move funds there. That’s when the US is vulnerable to a crash. The fed and gov will try to print but nobody will take on US debt — hey, I can save in euros/yen now that they’ve turned it around. That’s when the US will be vulnerable to a boom.
Your indicators are Japan, Germany and UK. If they start showing up with high interest rates — watch out. Then everyone will say, why didn’t we listen back in 2011 when rating agencies took away the US AAA rating? Until then, just watch the show.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: No Name Guy @ 21 –
“It’s a fallacy that government spending = positive product.
Some schmuck govt drone in DC, or a local school district “program coordinator” pushing paper produces exactly nothing. Yet their pay and bene’s shows up at a positive on the GDP, not a negative like it should (since they’re taking money that could be spent by the taxpayer on actual goods or services).”
1. You may not like the services that they produce; but that isn’t the same as nothing.
2. They are taxpayers.
3. They do spend the money on actual goods or services.
4. They are certainly no more useless in their production than Rush Limbaugh.
The fallacy is to think that “spending = positive product” is somehow different based on whether the spending is private or government.
“In private industry, if someone won’t buy it, or it’s not absolutely necessary to produce a product that someone will buy, it’s ruthlessly cut out.”
Private industry covers everything from producing widgets to murder for hire. There’s always someone willing to buy heroin, slaves, and the ramblings of Ayn Rand. It’s really not a comprehensive model for what’s good in society.
“By that measure, a sizable fraction of what the Govt does is either an active drain or neutral at best. (Neutral would be, for example, a transfer payment – steal from taxpayer A and hand to Sponge / mooch / leech B to spend on actual goods and services, while the active drain in this activity would be the substantial Government administrative expense and over head.)”
If it is neutral to pay someone who does nothing money to spend on actual goods and services, it would be equally neutral to pay the person who facilitates the payments (or whatever) so long as they are of moderate enough income that they will spend the money on actual goods and services too. That’s not an active drain; that’s consistency.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Another thing that has bothered me in all of these deficit talks is that it seems to me governments keep lowering taxes. We have this big debate about Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, but we also had the cuts on capital gains. Some one posted a tax comparison of various countries, and I was surprised how low taxes were, globally.
Has the velocity of money taken over in our consumer credit economies?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I have heard many talk about the tax cuts for the wealthy as bad. How can someone in their right mind argue with Arthur Laugher when he says “if you tax someone 100% they stop working”. Somewhere before 100% they move their corporations to Dubai (AKA Haliburton) or they move assets outside of the country.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I must admit, I’m surprised that Dimon & crew still has overhang from the Bear & WAMU putbacks. I would have thought JPM fenced in their losses fairly tightly when the FRB & FDIC begged them to take over the failing institutions. As Gomer Pyle USMC used to say…soo-prise soo-prise.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/dimon-vows-fight-moynihan-lost-040001828.html
Rate this comment:
0 
0
This guy has my dream job! He gets paid to do what I do for free.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47025412/ns/local_news-seattle_wa/#.T4bhxFGWfcE
(BTW, another good size earthquake in Mexico after that was written.)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By whatsmyname @ 27:
That’s rather irrelevant since they only pay for about .00000000000000001% of their spending decisions.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: yukon dave @ 29 -
Tax cuts are good when your debts are paid and you’re running surpluses.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By yukon dave @ 29:
Exactly. It’s impossible to argue seriously that taxes do not hinder the economy. So instead what people do is pick two points in time, compare the taxes and state of the economy at those two points in time, and then pretend everything else was the same so that they can pretend taxes don’t hinder the economy.
Rather obviously we need some level of taxes to avoid having anarchy. But the trick is to have those taxes be as low as possible, and to tax things that will have the least effect on the economy as possible. That’s why I’ve been advocating higher taxes for W-2 income. While a 100% tax would stop someone from going to work everyday, a 5% increase in taxes for most people would not have that impact. In contrast, a 5% increase in taxes for business (or even talk of such an increase) will hinder business activity, which is part of the reason our recovery has been so slow.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Dirty Renter @ 33:
Probably, but that doesn’t mean it’s the only time they are good.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: redmondjp @ 10 –
You’re Wrong; Richland Median Home Prices are $134K and Going Down
Your relatives are feeding you hype.
http://www.trulia.com/real_estate/Richland-Washington/
And landing a job [its a green job, considering no carbon footprint] at a reactor would pay 3-4 times the pay those Seattle gardening jobs pay. You’d be rich in Richland.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Tatiana Kalashnikov @ 25 – I like that you call her Baby.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: David S @ 37 – Not sure if you’re joking:
http://www.glock.com/english/glock26.htm
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: David S @ 37 – I wonder if Tatiana packs “Baby” with a thigh holster or a Flashbang bra holster?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: softwarengineer @ 36 – I realize I’m wasting my time engaging w/ SWE, but I concur w/ RedmondJP – Tri-Cities are overvalued, but they are a world unto themselves. There are also significant differences between 99352 & 99354.
I also question Trulia’s data – they have Kennewick’s median sale price @ $2.8 MM, which is impossible:
http://www.trulia.com/real_estate/Kennewick-Washington/
Interesting what you consider a green job – radioactive waste disposal doesn’t count?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: David S @ 37 – “Nobody puts Baby in a corner. …”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By ChrisM @ 40:
Not unless you’re exposed and start glowing.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By ChrisM @ 40:
Effectively a lot of government employment there, so they will have higher prices, just like Kitsap County, Olympia, Washington DC., etc.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 43 Agreed. It is a very odd dynamic due to all the government and government contractor jobs. I used to work for a now-defunct wireless company, when wireless was in its infancy. (back when a TDMA phone cost $1800) . Most applicants for service in the tri-cities had stellar credit, something that I still remember to this day.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 17:
yet you were so sure the economic collapse would happen january of 2011…
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By No Name Guy @ 11:
1. the government is not a family budget.
2. how is austerity going for Greece, Spain and other countries?
3. austerity disproven in real-time right before your eyes.
Fiscal Policy and Growth In Europe
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/21/fiscal-policy-and-growth-in-europe/
4. interest rates are at all-time lows for all intents and purposes.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 34:
no some of the highest taxed economies have some of the best growth and most equal societies.
Just think of recent history. unfunded tax cuts for for the rich under Bush ended with a crash. the Clinton tax increases didn’t stop a boom.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Guess what, the Ryan budget cuts taxes for the rich and raises taxes on the poor!
http://www.offthechartsblog.org/ryan-budget-would-raise-some-taxes-guess-who-gets-hit/
What we should really do is let the bush tax cuts expire(thereby stabilizing debt levels) and do a revenue neutral pollution(carbon) tax. We could even up the lower brackets just in case the poor are hurt by it. or we could make it revenue neutral as to taxes for the poor. it’s what they just did in Australia.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: ChrisM @ 40 –
I Document Average Sales Prices at $134K in Richland
You offer just unfound allegations and insult me too. Which method holds up in court?
If you’ve read my past blogs I am very concerned about radioactive waste from nuclear plants, earthquakes/dams, mercury/coal, etc…..the root cause is overpopulation and until we deal with that we’re missing the whole point entirely and if we likely do nothing about overpopulation, hades, ya gotta eat and feed your family. Look after yourself and your own financial future; no one else will.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By pfft @ 47:.
Seriously, best growth? It’s easier for something small to have a higher growth rate. Smaller companies typically have higher growth rates than larger companies.
And as to the second paragraph, Google the word “causation.” Or how about checking out what website you’re on and then perhaps reassessing what you think caused the crash of the economy! /sarc
As I said originally, some people like to pretend the result is different than what it is by noting two different periods in time and pretending everything else is equal between those periods. Thank you for providing an excellent example of someone pretending.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
fracking is the new subprime.
Earthquake Outbreak in U.S. Tied to Fracking Wastewater
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-12/earthquake-outbreak-in-central-u-s-tied-to-drilling-wastewater.html
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 50:
why don’t you post some data about your original claim. so us taxes inhibit growth
“As I said originally, some people like to pretend the result is different than what it is by noting two different periods in time and pretending everything else is equal between those periods.”
by that logic EVERY time is a different time and not very relevant. the Clinton tax increases were supposed to cost us 10 million jobs according to some Republicans. didn’t happen.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Hey- there’s a tax for that!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=MFSr08waHA8
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: pfft @ 52 – Seriously, you want data to prove the obvious? Tax everyone at 100% and see how many people continue to go to work. Tax businesses at 100% and see how many stay open.
You can argue otherwise, but I’ll restate that no one can seriously claim that taxes do not hinder economic activity.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 54:
your only evidence is tax everyone at 100%? not going to cut it.
studies show that raising taxes doesn’t discourage people working in any meaningful way. for the higher incomes there is basically no effect. talking about taxing people at 100% rates doesn’t do anything to advance the discussion.
these high-tax countries have some of the highest standards of living in the world with equality and good economic growth. Denmark, Sweden and Norway are perpetually at the top of the best places to live.
http://www.offthechartsblog.org/thinking-about-tax-policy-part-2-taxes-today-are-low/
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By pfft @ 55:
Ignore the impact of taxes at your own peril. The government, however, should not do that.
As to your studies, that’s why I’m suggesting taxing people with W2 income more. I don’t think a slight increase in tax rate will affect their employment that significantly. Greater increases will, but very few W2 earners turn down employment or raises due to taxes. Businesses are different.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 56 – RE: pfft @ 55 –
Hey, he has a chart to prove it- we are a low tax country! I’m not sure where the correlation between tax rates and living standards comes from though. the chart only shows .gov spending as a percentage of GDP, i.e. which countries are the most socialist. If Denmark is heaven, pfffffft wins.
BUT- buried down in the fine print so to speak is this little gem. Who can tell me what’s wrong with making the jump from this statement to our current situation- in fact the situation for the last several decades?:
” CBO has found that tax increases used to reduce budget deficits can improve long-term economic growth and job creation.”
In short, the piece and the author are both intellectually dishonest in presenting the data/argument as they do. If anyone believes the premise put forth, we can check it by taking the next step. Want to be an even more “successful” country than the current top three? Then let’s take 60% of GDP in .gov revenue and shoot to the top of the pile in both living standards and future growth potential!
Rate this comment:
0 
0
It’s all Bush’s fault:
https://yfrog.com/kg4fsap:tw1
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Obama screws the generation that got him elected:
https://yfrog.com/od8wdap:tw1
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Scotsman @ 59 – The problem is I think most probably accept the argument that President Obama started in a big hole. While that’s certainly true, the way to climb out of that hole wasn’t to pass Obamacare and repeatedly threaten tax increases on business. Both of those things create a lot of uncertainty for business, and that causes businesses to be cautious. Lots of those who are currently unemployed have no one else to blame for their situation but President Obama.
I forgot to mention that President Obama also increased the risk of failure, by personally vilifying those in certain industries that failed. Being more conservative in business leads to less employment.
Interesting that he didn’t take that same route for the incumbents in Congress in 2008. Oh wait . . .. ;-)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Scotsman @ 59 – Correlates to the financial crash. The crash was caused by weak crony regulators under W’s watch. Clinton’s repeal of Glass-Steagal, and other legistaltion under his watch set the stage. Our leaders generally suck. They must excel at getting elected. That is the only qualification.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Blurtman @ 61 -
True, but also true that O blew through several $trillion. He should have done a better job of targeting, i.e. someone besides the banks. This is year 4 of his tenure- when is it not Bush’s fault anymore? I just want to know when we can start holding the O responsible.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Scotsman @ 62 –
Obama could have let the economy collapse, not spent a dime, not saved the banking system as we know it, and been a hero.
Instead he pushed for Health Care Reform, spent trillions of dollars, and turned the economy around. What’s the problem?
I think most global leaders would applaud his actions, because it saved a lot of wealth.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 32:
In context of the conversation, your argument here is that, “some schmuck govt drone in DC, and a local school district program coordinator” are making the spending decisions for the entire government.
I dont’ think I’d want my name on an argument like that.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Pegasus @ 39:
Did you forget that you’re on the internet? Tatiana may be an attractive young russian brunette with a famous rifle surname and penchant for glocks and house prices. Scotsman may be Gonzo, and I may be a garbage filled, wrecked house. But probably not.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRLwKw9up3s
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: pfft @ 51 – It’s stimulative.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 57:
what exactly are you saying?
by the way research just came out that says tax rates can go way up and not hurt economic growth.
“CBO has found that tax increases used to reduce budget deficits can improve long-term economic growth and job creation.”
we know that right now that is not the case though. there is no crowding out right now.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 56:
how’d the bush unfunded tax cuts for the rich and 2001 and 2003 work out for us? how’d the clinton tax increases work out for us?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 60:
“repeatedly threaten tax increases on business.”
such as?
do you realize how much stronger our economy is when our people can get healthcare? can a dead person work for a business? can a dead person own a small business? can a dead person provide food for their family or look after the household? most bankputcies have some element of healthcare debt involved.
anyways surveys have shown that the number concern of businesses is lack of demand.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Scotsman @ 62:
it’s the fault of the Republican Congress. remember when Boehner credited good jobs numbers to the fact that the House when to Republicans? I do. I guess he’s not taking credit now. or at least this month.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By whatsmyname @ 27:
Not my point at all. My point is in the context of what you’re talking about, it doesn’t matter that they are taxpayers. Nothing they do affects the taxes they have to pay in any significant way.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By pfft @ 68:
Are you really that dense? You think all the other factors in the economy were the same at those two points in time?
Seriously. Quit pretending that you know what you’re talking about. Quit pretending period.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: Kary L. Krismer @ 71 –
I don’t mean to be dense, but I am not following your argument. As I see it, No Name Guy is arguing that the salaries for these guys should not be included in GDP because it is “money the taxpayer could spend on actual goods and services”
My response is that it should be included in GDP as the money is spent on actual goods and services – produced by these people. And further, these people are taxpayers; who use that money to pay taxes and to buy goods and services. Some Randians seem to think that there is a heroic, and monolithic “taxpayer” (god) which they can use as a club against real people who pay real taxes.
But none of this has anything to do with someone controlling government taxing, or spending. You introduced that.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By yukon dave @ 29:
I’ve heard many people talk about closing the jails as bad. How can someone in their right mind argue that we should arrest people? If you arrest 100% of the people, they will not be free. Somewhere before 100%, they will flee your jurisdiction.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By Kary L. Krismer @ 72:
how come you didn’t mention all those factors when you said w/o any qualifications that tax increases hurt business hiring? you debunked yourself!
anyone with a brain knows that trickle-down doesn’t work. they rejected it when hoover propogated it.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By whatsmyname @ 74:
I bow before your greatness.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Hey look wall street is not out of touch.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
RE: whatsmyname @ 73 – Perhaps part of the problem understanding me is that on your overall post, I agree with you. I’m just saying I don’t see the fact that the government employees are taxpayers as a very relevant argument. That they are taxpayers doesn’t affect their actions, and the individual tax contribution of the individual is minor. So I picked on that one point, but not your overall point.
Maybe I misunderstood why you were pointing out that they were taxpayers. The government could not tax them and then pay them less, but I don’t see how that would affect your main argument at all, or anything else. That’s why I don’t see the fact that they are taxpayers as being relevant. But overall I agree government services can be valuable.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By pfft @ 75:
Because you determine the impact of minor actions which are otherwise hard to determine by determining the impact of major items. Even Democrats agree that temporary tax cuts are stimulative, which is why they are throwing the social security system under the bus right now. Even Democrats agree that you shouldn’t raise taxes when the economy is particularly fragile. You’re disputing something that virtually everyone agrees on.
And this has nothing to do with trickle down. I’m talking about total GDP, not how the GDP is split.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
By whatsmyname @ 74:
Kurt Vonnegut had a short story about a society where they started locking everyone up. Does anyone remember the name?
The jail analogy is somewhat related. Obviously no jails is just as bad as no taxes. Obviously locking everyone up is just as bad as taxing everyone at 100%. The question is the proper level of locking people up and the proper level of taxing them.
I would argue that with the war on drugs we’re locking up way too many people, and also diverting way too many people to a life of crime in other areas. Government likes to act to levels of excess when it comes to jails and taxes. A less intrusive government would be better in both areas.
Rate this comment:
0 
0